Idaho Supreme Court hears Lori Vallow Daybell's appeal

Appeal heard in Boise

The Idaho Supreme Court heard oral arguments on November 2 in Lori Vallow Daybell's appeal of her convictions in the killings of her children and the conspiracy to kill Tammy Daybell.

The court's calendar listed the case as docket 51091, with arguments scheduled for 11:15 a.m. in Boise. The appeal arose from proceedings in Fremont County before District Judge Steven Boyce. [1] [2]

Dispute over former attorney

According to Local News 8, appellate attorney Craig Durham argued that the earlier joint representation of Lori and Chad Daybell did not establish the conflict required to remove her former lawyer, Mark Means.

The state's attorney, Jeffrey Nye, defended the disqualification. He referred to filings made during a period when Vallow Daybell had been found incompetent to proceed, the station reported. [2]

Other challenges to the trial

The Supreme Court's case summary lists additional claims concerning participation in the disqualification hearings, proceedings held in Vallow Daybell's absence, the admission of evidence relating to Arizona and the denial of her speedy-trial arguments.

Local News 8 reported that the justices would deliberate before issuing a written decision. [1] [2]

Convictions and appellate questions before the court

An Ada County jury convicted Vallow Daybell in May 2023 of first-degree murder conspiracy counts involving her children, Joshua “JJ” Vallow and Tylee Ryan, and of conspiring to murder Tammy Daybell. The jury also convicted her of grand theft. Judge Steven Boyce later imposed life sentences without the possibility of parole on the murder-related counts. Chad Daybell was tried separately and convicted in 2024. The appeal did not constitute a retrial of witnesses or physical evidence. The justices considered whether the district court committed legal errors serious enough to affect the convictions. The state argued that the trial court’s decisions should be upheld, while Vallow Daybell’s appellate lawyer asked the court to reverse or otherwise grant relief. The Supreme Court summary identified claims concerning statutory and constitutional speedy-trial rights. Competency proceedings interrupted the criminal case, and the appeal required the justices to examine how those periods affected time calculations and later rulings. The appeal also challenged proceedings conducted when Vallow Daybell was not present and restrictions on her participation in hearings about Means’s disqualification. A separate issue concerned material connected to events in Arizona. The lawyer-removal question required the court to examine the relationship among Means, Vallow Daybell and Chad Daybell after Means had represented both defendants during earlier stages. The state maintained that the trial judge had authority to address a conflict that could affect the fairness of later proceedings. The defense argued that the record did not establish the conflict required for disqualification. Appellate review turns on the trial record and the legal standard assigned to each claimed error. The Supreme Court may affirm the judgment, reverse particular rulings or send issues back to the district court depending on its conclusions. Questions asked during oral argument did not decide the case. The justices took the matter under advisement and will issue a written opinion or order stating the result and legal grounds. [1] [2]